umachandran synopsis 04032010

8/7/2019 UMACHANDRAN synopsis 04032010

1/24

STUDY ON OCCUPATION FACTORS AND

ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT ON

QUALITY OF WORK LIFE AMONG MANAGEMENT

CADRE OF SELECTED IT AND MANUFACTURING

ORGANIZATIONS

SYNOPSIS OF THE THESIS

Submitted by

K. UMACHANDRAN

for the award of the degree

of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT

Dr. M G REDUCATIONAL AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE

UNIVERSITY(Declared u/s 3 of the UGC Act,1956)

CHENNAI 600 095

MARCH 2010


2/24

CONTENTS

1. Introduction2. Significance of the study3. Objectives of the study4. Hypothesis of the study5. Methodology Research design and Sample of the study6. Pilot Study7. Tools used8. Main Study9. Statistical Analysis used10. Major finding of the study11. Chapterisation


3/24

1. INTRODUCTION

The concept of QWL as per Likert (1961), Davis (1983), McGregor

(1960) acknowledge the positive element in reorganization of industrial system

and is based on the logic that any productive system has a technical dimension

interdependent on the socio-economic and psychological variables. Lawler

(1982) metamorphosis the concept and stated that QWL as a variable and

everything what an organization did for the welfare of the employees. Indeed

any conscious effort that is aimed at improving the working conditions, work

content, and its attendant conditions like salary, safety, security, fringe benefitscan legally be entitled to qualify for QWL. It is a concept which outreaches its

scope both inside and outside the work related life.

Davis (1983) states that the quality depends on the relationship between

employees and the total working environment with human dimensions added to

the usual technical and economic considerations. The balance theory on thestress load by Smith and Carayon Sainfort (1989) identifies the sources of

occupational stressors and psychological factors that influence behaviour at

work. Therefore work life is influenced by the Job Characteristics, Freedom at

work and its decisiveness leading to individual satisfaction at work. These

variables are influenced by determinants such as knowledge, Skills, Performance

and leadership congruent on work. The cognitive disposition of these in a

facilitating way to the employees will segment towards better management

facilitations in favor of the organizational goal.


4/24

Walton (1974) on QWL proposed eight dimensions which included

healthy environment, development of human capacities, growth and security,

social integration and constitutionalism. These dimensions can be structured as

facilitating environment for Shared contribution which is captured by intrinsic

and extrinsic knowledge collation, develop the human capacities by facilitating

Experience sharing, growth based and coordinated through Contributions

and skill of deriving work through the mastery of getting done. These are

Organization development (OD) variables commonly known as Knowledge

Management, Training and Development, Performance Management and

Leadership development.

These variables have varied portrayal of meaning and doctrines embedded

in them based on two broader segmentations such as Knowledge based and

Product based organizations. This research drills down to study IT professionals

in the Knowledge segment and Manufacturing professionals in the

Manufacturing companies on Product segments.

2. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

Many factors influence an employees Quality of Work Life (QWL) which

ultimately impacts on the commitment to the organization. Single scrupulous

influential factor that the aforementioned researchers have repeatedly shown to

be significantly correlated to the Quality of work life is namely occupation

support and organization development facilitators, Moore (2000); Moore &

Bruke (2002).


5/24

Brief (1998) states that Job satisfaction has been defined as a pleasurable

emotional state resulting from the appraisal of ones job an affective reaction to

ones job and an attitude towards ones job. Therefore Job Satisfaction can be an

important indicator of how employees feel about their jobs and a predictor of

work behaviors such as organizational citizenship. It serves as Sense of inner

fulfillment and pride achieved when performing a particular job. Job satisfaction

occurs when an employee feels he has accomplished something having

importance and value worthy of recognition; sense of joy.

Richard Boyatziz (1982) in the publication The competent Manager: A

model for effective performance suggested that a competency was a combination

of a motive, trait, skill, aspect of one's self-image or social role, or a body of

relevant knowledge. In other words, a competency is any characteristic of an

individual that might be related to successful Performance. To clarify further its

an underlying characteristics of an employee that results in effective and /or

superior performance. The present study is significant as the Indian culture is

more dominated by authoritarian and reluctant to share power, which may of

course vary from one organization to other. Not baring the business is run, even

newer business houses such as IT are having a same treatment as that in

Manufacturing organizations when it comes to Quality of Work Life.


6/24

Sirgy et al. (2001) Suggested that the key factors in quality of working life are:

Need satisfaction based on job requirements, Need satisfaction based on Work

environment, Need satisfaction based on Supervisory behaviour, Need satisfaction

based on Ancillary programmes, Organizational commitment. They defined quality of

working life as satisfaction of these key needs through resources, activities, and

outcomes stemming from participation in the workplace. Maslows needs were seen as

relevant in underpinning this model, covering Health & safety, Economic and family,

Social, Esteem, Actualisation, Knowledge and Aesthetics, although the relevance of

non-work aspects is play down as attention is focused on quality of work life rather

than the broader concept of quality of life.

Though the study is narrow and have a limited scope of confining the reach

within an organizational context, it is an attempt to identify and measure the

dimensions of QWL from socio-economic and psychological point of view and

compare it among management cadre employed in the organization, selected for the

study. In a way, the study has both narrow and broader perspectives. The logic for

narrowing down the scope is to have an in depth analysis of the study inter-alia

attempt to add a literature on QWL in Management cadre employed in IT and

Manufacturing organizations where the uniqueness of the Occupation is affected more

by the Job Characteristics, Empowerment and Job Satisfaction. Each Organization

through its Organization development initiatives such as Knowledge Management,Training and Development, Performance management & Leadership evolution create

Centers of Excellence to groom and develop the competencies in its talent pool of

managers. The current research focuses on the how these factors of the Independent and

Intervening variables have an impact on the dependent variable.


7/24

3. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

Based on the reviews available in the field, the investigator has proposed

the following objectives.

1. To develop a comprehensive scale identifying the factors relatedOccupation and Organization Development.

2. To find out the effect of personal variables such as age, marital status,nativity, position, family, medium of study, course, level of education,

gender orientation and organization on the factors of Occupation namely

a. Job Characteristicsb. Empowermentc. Job Satisfaction


gender orientation and organization on the factors of Organization

Development (OD) namely

a. Knowledge Managementb. Training & Developmentc. Performance Managementd. Leadership Development.


8/24


gender orientation and organization on the factors of Quality of Work

Life (QWL).

5. To examine the contribution of personal variables to Occupation factorsand Organization Development variables.

6. To examine the association among the variables of Occupation,Organization Development and Quality of Work life.

4. HYPOTHESIS OF THE STUDY

Based on the literature available in the field of Occupation, Organization

development and Quality of Work life the investigator has formulated the

following null hypothesis and they are

1. There is no significant difference among the different age group ofrespondents on the factors of Occupation.

a.Job Characteristics

b.Empowermentc.Job Satisfaction

2. There is no significant difference among the different age group ofrespondents on the factors of Organization Development (OD).


9/24

a.Knowledge Managementb.Training and Developmentc.Performance Managementd.Leadership Development

3. There is no significant difference among the different age group ofrespondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life (QWL).

4. There is no significant difference between unmarried and married groupof respondents on the factors of Occupation.

a.Job Characteristicsb.Empowermentc.Job Satisfaction

5. There is no significant difference among the different age group ofrespondents on the factors of Organization Development (OD).

a.Knowledge Management

b.Training and Developmentc.Performance Managementd.Leadership Development


10/24

6. There is no significant difference among the different age group ofrespondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life (QWL).

7. There is no significant difference between the rural and urban nativitygroup of respondents on the factors of Occupation.


8. There is no significant difference between the rural and urban nativity groupof respondents on the factors of Organization Development (OD).

a. Knowledge Managementb. Training and Developmentc. Performance Managementd. Leadership Development

9. There is no significant difference between the rural and urban nativitygroup of respondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life (QWL).

10.There is no significant difference among the different position group ofrespondents on the factors of Occupation.



11/24

11. There is no significant difference among the different position group ofrespondents on the factors of Organization Development (OD).


12. There is no significant difference among the different position group ofrespondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life (QWL).

13. There is no significant difference among the different family group ofrespondents on the factors of Occupation.


14. There is no significant difference among the different family group ofrespondents on the factors of Organization Development (OD).

a.Knowledge Managementb.Training and Developmentc.Performance Managementd.Leadership Development


12/24

15. There is no significant difference among the different family group ofrespondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life (QWL).

16. There is no significant difference between the English & native languagemedium of study in the respondents on the factors of Occupation.

a.Job Characteristicsb.Empowerment

c.Job Satisfaction17. There is no significant difference between the English & native language

medium of study in the respondents on the factors of Organization

Development (OD).

a. Knowledge Management

b. Training and Developmentc. Performance Managementd. Leadership Development

18. There is no significant difference between the English & native languagemedium of study in the respondents on the factors of Quality of Work

Life (QWL).

19. There is no significant difference among the different Course group ofrespondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life (QWL).


13/24

20. There is no significant difference among the level of Education ofrespondents on the factors of Occupation.


21. There is no significant difference between the Level of Education in therespondents on the factors of Organization Development (OD).


22. There is no significant difference between the Level of Education in therespondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life (QWL).

23. There is no significant difference between the Co-ed and Uni-sex genderorientation in the respondents on the factors of Occupation.



14/24

24. There is no significant difference between the Co-ed and Uni-sex genderorientation in the respondents on the factors of Organization Development

(OD).


25. There is no significant difference between the Co-ed and Uni-sex genderorientation in the respondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life(QWL).

26. There is no significant difference between the IT and ManufacturingOrganization in the respondents on the factors of Occupation.


27. There is no significant difference between the IT and ManufacturingOrganization in the respondents on the factors of Organization

Development (OD).



15/24

28. There is no significant difference between the IT and ManufacturingOrganization in the respondents on the factors of Quality of Work Life

(QWL).

29. Whether the personal variables will significantly contribute to thevariables

a. Job Characteristicsb. Empowermentc.

Job Satisfaction

d. Knowledge Managemente. Training and Developmentf. Performance Managementg. Leadership Developmenth. Quality of Work Life

30. There is a positive relationship among the factors ofa.Occupationb.Organization Development (OD)

c.Quality of Work Life (QWL)


16/24

5. METHODOLOGY

For the purpose of the present study and fulfillment of the objectives formulated in

the present study, both primary & secondary data have been collected.

a.Research DesignThe researcher has selected the ex-post factor research design which can be

highly suitable for the present study. The main characteristics of the ex-post

factor is that researcher do no have any control over the variable studied and

he can report only what has happened or what is happening.

b.Sample of the StudyIn the present study, 183 male respondents were randomly selected from 5

different organizations mainly manufacturing and IT sectors. Their age

ranges from 25 to 40 years with mean age of 31.5 years.

6. PILOT STUDY

The pilot study was conducted among the 25% of the total sample ( N =

183) of male respondents in the present study. During the pilot study, the

investigator has developed two questionnaire namely Occupation Factor Scale and

Organization Development Questionnaire. These were further subjected to Factor

analysis method. Reliability measure was done for the dependent variable of

Quality of Work life questionnaire. Both face and content validity were

established with the opinion of the experts in the field of investigation.


17/24

7. TOOLS USED

To fulfill the objectives and hypothesis framed in the present study the

investigator has developed the following questionnaire after brief discussion

with experts in the field and reviews related to the filed of study. The tools used

are personal data sheet, Occupation factor scale, Organization development

questionnaire and Quality of work life questionnaire.

a. OCCUPATION FACTOR SCALE

40 items of the Occupation factor Scale developed by the investigator and during

the pilot study with the sample of 45 respondent data were subjected to Factor

analysis and items were merged with independent factors namely Job

Characteristics, Empowerment and Job Satisfaction. Both face and content

validity were established.

b. ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

65 items of the Organization development questionnaire developed by the

investigator during the pilot study with the sample of 45 respondent data were

subjected to Factor analysis and items were merged with independent factors

namely Knowledge Management, Training and Development, Performance

Management and Leadership development. Both face and content validity were

established.


18/24

c. QUALITY OF WORK LIFE QUESTIONNAIRE

25 items of Quality of Work Life questionnaire developed by Saravanan (2008),

the questionnaire was used by the investigator with the established reliability and

validity for the purpose of the study. The questionnaire measures the overall

quality of work life of employees and classifies them as poor, moderate and high

levels.

8. MAIN STUDY

During the main study the sample of 183 male respondents comprising of IT and

Manufacturing personnel were randomly selected in 4 private sector

organizations in and around the city of Chennai. They were administered the

following tools namely

1.Personal data sheet,2.Occupation Factor Scale,3.Organization Development Questionnaire and4.Quality of Work Life Questionnaire.

The data were statistically analyzed by using SPSS package for the hypothetical

testing in the study


19/24

9. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED

1.Factor Analysisa)For Occupation Factor Scale 3

independent factors were emerged.

b)For Organization DevelopmentQuestionnaire 4 independent factors

were emerged.

2. t Test Used to find out the significance of meandifference between the Demographic

variables and Independent and

Dependent variable.

3. One way ANOVA Used to find out the significance of meandifference among the demographic

variables with Independent and

Dependent variables.

4.Multiple Regression Analysis. Used to find out the contribution ofpersonal variables with Independent and

Dependent variables.


20/24

5. Correlation Co-efficient Used to find out the association on thestudy variables.

6. Alpha Reliability Used to find out the reliability measure forCo-efficient of Correlation a) Occupation Factor Scale

b)Organization development Questionnairec)Quality of Work Life Questionnaire

10. MAJOR FINDINGS OF THE STUDY

Based on the statistical Analysis the following findings emerged.

1. In the present study, the investigator has developed the comprehensivescale of Occupation Factor Scale measuring 3 Occupational factors and

Organization Development Questionnaire by measuring 4 independent

factors.

2. Significant difference was found among the 3 different age group ofrespondent on the factors of Job characteristics, Empowerment, Job

Satisfaction, Knowledge Management, Training and development,

Performance Management and Leadership Development.

No significant difference was found among the different age group of

respondent on Quality of Work Life.


21/24

3. Significant difference was noticed between Married and Unmarried groupof employees on Knowledge Management, Performance Management and

Quality of Work Life. The Unmarried group of respondent scored higher

value than married life.

4. Comparison of Rural and Urban respondent significant difference wasnoticed on Job Satisfaction and Performance Management.

5. Significant difference was found among the 4 different personal on allvariables in the study (Occupation, Organization Development and Quality

of Work Life).

6. Comparison of 3 different family group of respondent, significantdifference was found on the variables of Job Characteristics, Job

Satisfaction, Knowledge Management, Performance Management and

Quality of Work Life.

7. Comparison of Medium of Instruction studied by the respondent in theirHigher Secondary School Levels, significant difference were noticed on the

variables on Knowledge Management, Training and Development.

8. A comparison was made of the employees who studied different course inEngineering disciplines. A significant difference was notices on all sevenvariables studied (three factors of Occupation and four factors of

Organization development)


22/24

9. Significant difference was notices in the educational background of thecorrespondent on the variables of Job Characteristics, Empowerment, Jon

Satisfaction, Knowledge management, Performance management and Quality

of Work Life.

10.Significant difference was noticed between Co-ed and Uni-sex gender orientationon the variables of Job Characteristics, Job Satisfaction, Knowledge Management,

Performance Management and Quality of work Life.

11.A comparison of personnel in IT and Manufacturing Industry, significantdifference was noticed in the factors of Job Characteristics, Job satisfaction,

Training and development, Leadership development and Quality of Work

Life.

12.A high degree of positive relationship was found among the variables in thestudy.

13.The multiple regression analysis was carried out to find out the contributionof personnel variables on Independent and dependent variables. The result

found that the demographic variables such as Age, Family, Organization,

Marital Status, Nativity, Position, Education, Gender orientation,

Organization, course and family highly contributed to the present study.

Overall the present study emphasis the lead for periodical training programmes

to sustain motivation of employees for facilitating Quality of Work life.


23/24

11. CHAPTERISATION

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION

This chapter deals with the variables of Occupation, Organization Development

and Quality of Work Life. The Chapter also deals with concepts, definition,

theories models and factors related to variables listed.

CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE

The chapter deals with a review of studies pertaining to the variables of

Occupation, Organization Development and Quality of Work Life both in

developing and developed countries. This chapter is ended with summary of

reviews for framing the objectives of the study.

CHAPTER III STATEMENT OF PROBLEM AND

HYPOTHESIS

This chapter highlights the problem focused in the study and followed by the

formulation of hypothesis in the study.

CHAPTER IV METHODOLOGY

The chapter deals with Research Design, Sampling Method, Development of the

Tools with Factorial Study, Pilot Study, Main Study and Statistical Analysis.


24/24

CHAPTER V RESULTS & DISCUSSION

The data collected was subjected to Statistical methods for testing the hypothesis

in the study and they were subjected to t test, one way ANOVA, correlation of

co-efficient and Multiple regression analysis. The results of the statistical

analysis was discussed with appropriate previous studies in the relevant areas.

CHAPTER VI SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS

The last chapter provides the summary of the findings, conclusion drawn,

Implication of the study, Limitation of the study & ends with suggestions for

further research in the field.

umachandran synopsis 04032010

Documents